Chattisgarh High Court
Birasu Lal Padwar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 9 June, 2025
1
Digitally
signed by
BHOLA
BHOLA NATH
NATH KHATAI
KHATAI Date:
2025.06.10
17:56:20
+0530
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2612 of 2025
Birasu Lal Padwar Aged About 43 Years Resident Of Village
Gummatola, Police Station Gourela, District Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi
(C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Office, Police Of
Police Station Gourela, District Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.)
... Respondent
For Applicant : Mr. Vijay Shankar Mishra, Advocate
For Respondent : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy. Govt. Advocate
Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Order On Board
09.06.2025
1. This is the first bail application filed u/s 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant
who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.220/2024
registered at Police Station Gourela, District Gourela-Pendra-
Marwahi (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 302,
2
2. As per the prosecution case, the applicant, who is the village
Kotwar, is alleged to have called deceased Munni Bai on mobile
phone for getting the Van Adhikar Patta rectified and in
connivance with the co-accused committed her murder. On
receiving information about the murder, complainant Omprakash
reached the spot and as per his information, offence was
registered at Police Station Gourela, District Gourela-Pendra-
Marwahi (CG).
3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the
applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as there is no
direct evidence against him. He further submits that there are total
23 witnesses out of which only 7 witnesses have been examined
till date and the the applicant is in jail since 21.06.2024 and there
is no likelihood of the trial to be concluded at the earliest,
therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.
4. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, opposing the bail
application submits that on the memorandum statement of the
applicant, his mobile and several articles belonging to the
deceased have been seized. He further submits that on the date
of incident, there was mobile phone conversation between the
applicant and the deceased and the call record of which has also
been brought on record. Therefore, considering the evidence
available on record against the applicant and the nature of
offence, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
3
6. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the
case, particularly the nature and gravity of offence, the material
collected and available on record against the applicant and also
the fact that some important witnesses are yet to be examined,
this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail.
7. Accordingly, the present bail application is rejected. However, the
trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the
trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible.
8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information.
Sd/-
(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
JUDGE
Khatai